Skip to main content
Physics

Return to Question

deleted 3 characters in body; edited tags
Source Link
Waffle's Crazy Peanut
Waffle's Crazy Peanut
  • 9.2k
  • 8
  • 41
  • 79

In all the descriptions of the stellar life cycle it seems as though helium doesn't start being fused until all (most?) of the hydrogen is gone.

Is this true?
Why Why is this?

It seems counter intuitive. Consider a fire consisting of gasoline (hydrogen), and wood (helium). Sure the gasoline would burn up quicker, but the wood would still be consumed while the initial gasoline was being consumed.

In all the descriptions of the stellar life cycle it seems as though helium doesn't start being fused until all (most?) of the hydrogen is gone.

Is this true?
Why is this?

It seems counter intuitive. Consider a fire consisting of gasoline (hydrogen), and wood (helium). Sure the gasoline would burn up quicker, but the wood would still be consumed while the initial gasoline was being consumed.

In all the descriptions of the stellar life cycle it seems as though helium doesn't start being fused until all (most?) of the hydrogen is gone.

Is this true? Why is this?

It seems counter intuitive. Consider a fire consisting of gasoline (hydrogen), and wood (helium). Sure the gasoline would burn up quicker, but the wood would still be consumed while the initial gasoline was being consumed.

Source Link
deft_code
deft_code

Why doesn't helium start to fuse while there is still hydrogen fuel?

In all the descriptions of the stellar life cycle it seems as though helium doesn't start being fused until all (most?) of the hydrogen is gone.

Is this true?
Why is this?

It seems counter intuitive. Consider a fire consisting of gasoline (hydrogen), and wood (helium). Sure the gasoline would burn up quicker, but the wood would still be consumed while the initial gasoline was being consumed.